NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="herald" data-source="post: 256454" data-attributes="member: 1112">I have often thought of instuting this sort of thing myself. But my take was more like Bold Type:Bold types: Evil Clerics, Demons, serial kilers. Not so bold types would be the kind of people who wouldn't nessesarily do terrrible acts of cruelty, but wouldn't stop them either. Individuals like this are not irredemable, but not likely to be esily motivated to do good. Non-bold evil types can be perfectly charming, and even cling to most moral codes that Neutral and Good individuals might, but might be willing to put themselves above "the Law" so to speak. in one or more circumstances. For example: A non bold individual might upstanding and moral in most ways, but be a racist. (THIS IS NOT TO SAY RACISM IS ANY LESS WRONG THAN ANY OTHER EVIL IN THE WORLD)If said individual acts un ethically to said individual with aforthought to malice, I would say they were non bold evil.If they were to cause physical or emotional harm, or intimated harm or caused others to do so its BOLD EVIL.But it is my opinion that non bold evil is redeemable. It's why clerics go among the masses and preach. It's why Paladins exist. It's the reason cathedrals are created. To inspire individuals who might go down a dark path to aspire to a better life. Using this sort of comparison, it can be easy to see why an "evil" person might be friends with a "good" person. Both individual carry aspects that can be quite admirable, but character flaws only come to surface sometimes when real danger or deep loss occurs. We generally associate dark emotions with evil.HateJealousyRevengeGreedAngerThere are others, but we know from previous events in our own lives, every one is saddled with these feelings. It’s how we deal these that make or break us morally or ethically. There are several schools of thought on this I know and we could go round and round on this. But when it comes down to it, its what a person does in these emotional situations that define much of a person’s character. And that is where the alignment wheel often succeeds. It allows flexibility in explaining actions morality and ethics. Perhaps using and idea from AD&D would work better. Earlier versions of D&D showed characters having sort of two different alignments. Like NG <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f44e.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt="(n)" title="Thumbs down    (n)"  data-smilie="23"data-shortname="(n)" /> for a neutral good aligned person with some neutral tendencies. Or CN(g) for chaotic Neutral with some good tendencies. The former character might like to occasionally walk on the wild side, and do things that are questionable form time to time. The latter might have a soft spot for children or pets and actually go out of his way to assist or aid them. But might turn a blind eye to every one else. In the examples that I have shown you, I never saw a CE(g) or a LG(e). And it might seem far fetched at first glance, but it’s not really that big a leap in imagination. Perhaps it could show that an evil person could be redeemed or a good person could be beginning a slide into darkness.Well I’ve rambled enough.</blockquote>

Verification